Ukraine Needs More M1 Abrams Tanks Now

[Vambram]

Ukraine Needs More M1 Abrams Tanks Now

Providing sufficient M1 Abrams tanks now would help Ukraine repel Russian attacks over the winter and set it up for a more vigorous spring offensive.

nationalinterest.org

Providing sufficient M1 Abrams tanks now would help Ukraine repel Russian attacks over the winter and set it up for a more vigorous spring offensive.
Despite predictions for a swift victory in Ukraine, first by Moscow and then by Kyiv, the war in Ukraine is becoming what should have been expected from the outset: a long and difficult slog. Having been pushed by its Western backers into conducting an ill-advised major fall offensive before it had received sufficient Western armaments, Ukraine is now facing the challenging prospect of fending off Russian efforts to bleed its army dry while it prepares to go on offense next spring. If there is any hope for a Ukrainian victory, it rests on NATO nations, particularly the United States, providing it with sufficient advanced weapons and munitions to break through Russian defenses successfully. Ukraine urgently needs armored fighting vehicles, especially main battle tanks (MBTs) such as the M1 Abrams. Now is the time to send these tanks to Ukraine on the scale of hundreds.


Personally speaking, I am not hundred percent behind the idea of sending hundreds of M1A1 tanks and Main Battle Tanks to Ukraine. If we do so, then that will certainly deplete the American and European battalions of tanks. However, it might be necessary to do so. What are y'alls thoughts about this?

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Personally speaking, I am not hundred percent behind the idea of sending hundreds of M1A1 tanks and Main Battle Tanks to Ukraine. If we do so, then that will certainly deplete the American and European battalions of tanks.

Considering that the US military no longer uses the M1A1, I don't think this is a real concern. The current model used by the army is the M1A2 SEP, so any existing A1s in storage are surplus/reserve units that aren't part of any operational formations. Same goes for the Leopards and Challengers that European nations have sent.

 

[7thKeeper]

Considering that the US military no longer uses the M1A1, I don't think this is a real concern. The current model used by the army is the M1A2 SEP, so any existing A1s in storage are surplus/reserve units that aren't part of any operational formations. Same goes for the Leopards and Challengers that European nations have sent.

Yeah, these are not tanks that are used by active military personnel. I don't know where you get these ideas Vambram.

 

[Vambram]

Yeah, these are not tanks that are used by active military personnel. I don't know where you get these ideas Vambram.

I know that the M1A1 tanks are not the main model of Abrams that our military uses. I know that hundreds of them ain't hardly being used at all. However, that means that these older tanks, (from 1993- 1996 I was an M1A1 mechanic), will all need to be serviced with lots of maintenance, brought up to speed so that they are functional. Also, when these tanks are sent to Ukraine, it won't do Ukraine hardly any good if they do not also have the thousands upon thousands of spare parts to fix them after they get damaged. Also, the Ukraine military is going to have be trained to be able to use these tanks effectively, but also how to maintain and fix them. Finally, these tanks weigh around 60 tons each. Do y'all have any idea how long it would take to transport these tanks by rail and by ships to the nation of Ukraine? This is just a few of the problems that I can think of off the top of my head about Ukraine receiving and then being to effectively use these M1A1 Abrams tanks.

By the way, some of those problems I mentioned were also in the article which I posted in the OP.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

I know that the M1A1 tanks are not the main model of Abrams that our military uses. I know that hundreds of them ain't hardly being used at all. However, that means that these older tanks, (from 1993- 1996 I was an M1A1 mechanic), will all need to be serviced with lots of maintenance, brought up to speed so that they are functional. Also, when these tanks are sent to Ukraine, it won't do Ukraine hardly any good if they do not also have the thousands upon thousands of spare parts to fix them after they get damaged.

True.

Also, the Ukraine military is going to have be trained to be able to use these tanks effectively, but also how to maintain and fix them.

They already have some M1A1s - the training/maintenance side of things has already been done/is being done.

Finally, these tanks weigh around 60 tons each. Do y'all have any idea how long it would take to transport these tanks by rail and by ships to the nation of Ukraine?

Hardly an insurmountable logistical problem. In fact, it's precisely a logistical problem that the US military has planned and trained to accomplish for the past 70 years.

Yes, sending hundreds of older Abrams tanks to Ukraine wouldn't be an easy task, but aside from the spare parts situation, none of these difficulties does anything to modify the readiness of our active military, which is the worry you expressed. And even the spare parts may not matter that much - I have no idea what our parts stockpiles look like, how many parts are shared between the A1 and A2/A2 SEP variants, or what the feasibility of ramping up production lines would be. Also, keep in mind that they could always save a certain number of tanks to cannibalize for spares.

 

[Vambram]

M1A2 SEP Abrams Main Battle Tank | MilitaryToday.com

The M1A2 System Enhancement Package (SEP) is a successor to the M1A2. It is also an upgrade package for the older Abrams tanks. US military operates at least 900 MBTs upgraded to this standard.

www.militarytoday.com

Here's some interesting facts and numbers about the M1A1 SEP & M1A2 SEP variants.

 

[Gene2memE]

I know that the M1A1 tanks are not the main model of Abrams that our military uses. I know that hundreds of them ain't hardly being used at all. However, that means that these older tanks, (from 1993- 1996 I was an M1A1 mechanic), will all need to be serviced with lots of maintenance, brought up to speed so that they are functional.

There's other alternatives:

Transfer currently active M1A1s to Ukraine and re-equip US forces with refurbished M1A2s (of which there are nearly 1000 in storage). There are 540 M1A1 SAs in service, representing 20% of the active US tank fleet.

Transfer ex-USMC M1A1s to Ukraine. The USMC got rid of its active fleet of ~450 M1A1s by the end of late 2020. Some of these went to the US Army, but at least 120 went into storage. These are a bit of a hodgepodge (the USMC was in the middle of an upgrade programme), but they'll be in more usable condition than tanks in long term storage.

Transfer US Army pre-positioned stocks to Ukraine. The US has tank storage sites in Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands filled with M1A2s.

Also, when these tanks are sent to Ukraine, it won't do Ukraine hardly any good if they do not also have the thousands upon thousands of spare parts to fix them after they get damaged. Also, the Ukraine military is going to have be trained to be able to use these tanks effectively, but also how to maintain and fix them.

Ukraine has already set up maintenance infrastructure for the ~30 M1s it is in the process of receiving (both in country and under an agreement with Poland and Germany).

During 2023, there were about 400-500 Abrams crew and more the 200 Abrams maintenance technicians trained in the US.

Finally, these tanks weigh around 60 tons each. Do y'all have any idea how long it would take to transport these tanks by rail and by ships to the nation of Ukraine?

Not that long.

When extra equipment (including tanks) was sent from the continental USA spaces to Germany to expand pre-positioned stocks in 2022, transit time was under a month.

ARC operates eight roll-on roll-off cargo ships for the US under permanent contract. Each of these can transport more than 30 Abrams (as well as other armoured vehicles).

Trans-Atlantic shipping (likely to Germany) is probably 8-14 days, plus a 2-3 days of rail transport at each end.

The biggest hold up would probably be 'final mile' road transport, but I'm not clear on Ukraine's tank transporter capabilities.

 

[Vambram]

How is Biden getting a bunch of STORAGE SPACE freed-up (to put “newer-old-stuff” into) and assisting an ally keep their land theirs, “bad”?

Would you mind reading the rest of this thread and also my posts and reactions in this thread?

 

[iluvatar5150]

How is Biden getting a bunch of STORAGE SPACE freed-up (to put “newer-old-stuff” into) and assisting an ally keep their land theirs, “bad”?

It’s a good thing he already had a taker. Getting rid of big stuff like that on Marketplace is a pain in the butt.

 

[Pommer]

Would you mind reading the rest of this thread and also my posts and reactions in this thread?

Yeah, I had qualms myself about that one, I’ll go delete that shall I?

 

[Vambram]

Yeah, I had qualms myself about that one, I’ll go delete that shall I?

It's not necessary to do that. However I do thank you for this response.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Question, are they look to help win a war, or helping to prolong one?

Quick show of hands, is there anyone left that actually thinks Ukraine can "win" this war absent other countries putting "boots on the ground" so to speak? (or actually offering up the latest tech as opposed to giving them outdated stuff that we're looking to offload)

Knowing that if it's relegated to a "battle of attrition", Russia will always win, they have more bodies to throw at the endeavor, that's been their MO is just about every conflict they've ever been involved in.

So serious question, is anyone willing to put US boots on the ground or not?

If not?, then it's probably time to cut and run and let chips fall where they may
Because the method of "let's just send Ukraine some stuff and they can take the casualties" isn't going to "beat" Russia, Ukraine will run out of warm bodies before Russia does.

Sending them the bare minimum is tantamount to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Question, are they look to help win a war, or helping to prolong one?

Quick show of hands, is there anyone left that actually thinks Ukraine can "win" this war absent other countries putting "boots on the ground" so to speak? (or actually offering up the latest tech as opposed to giving them outdated stuff that we're looking to offload)

Knowing that if it's relegated to a "battle of attrition", Russia will always win, they have more bodies to throw at the endeavor, that's been their MO is just about every conflict they've ever been involved in.

Russia is not an endless font of things that can be destroyed. They can't last forever.

 

[Laodicean60]

Good.

Saudi Arabia hosted a secret meeting meant to strengthen Ukraine's hand in peace talks: report

The meeting held in Saudi Arabia last month was deliberately kept secret so that participating countries could feel at ease, sources told Bloomberg.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Laodicean60]

Would you mind reading the rest of this thread and also my posts and reactions in this thread?

I notice a bunch of posters here are title readers then they spout opinions. They just wait for your replies to argue about.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Russia is not an endless font of things that can be destroyed. They can't last forever.

Absent us (or another NATO power taking a larger role in "on-the-ground" activities), what do you see as the pathway for a Ukraine victory?

Keeping in mind, we're not talking about Russia needing to "last forever", in the context of this conflict, they just need to outlast Ukraine.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/19/europe/ukraine-difficulties-in-military-recruitment-intl/index.html

On the global stage, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been consistently on message: In visits to Washington and other Western capitals, he has focused on keeping Kyiv supplied with more advanced arms, ammunition and financing.

At home, however, he faces a human resources problem. The war is approaching the end of its second year, and Ukraine’s military needs more manpower to sustain a bloody war of attrition against Russia, a country with more than three times the population of Ukraine.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Absent us (or another NATO power taking a larger role in "on-the-ground" activities), what do you see as the pathway for a Ukraine victory?

Keeping in mind, we're not talking about Russia needing to "last forever", in the context of this conflict, they just need to outlast Ukraine.

He also needs to outlast whatever political resistance he faces at home. I haven't followed things enough to know what that situation is like right now, but historically, that's been at least as much of a problem for big powers as the indigenous resistance has been.

 

[Laodicean60]

He also needs to outlast whatever political resistance he faces at home.

This might be easier for him he'll just kill his opponents.

 

[Nithavela]

This might be easier for him he'll just kill his opponents.

I don't remember any instance of Zelensky killing his political opponents.

 

[Nithavela]

Question, are they look to help win a war, or helping to prolong one?

Quick show of hands, is there anyone left that actually thinks Ukraine can "win" this war absent other countries putting "boots on the ground" so to speak? (or actually offering up the latest tech as opposed to giving them outdated stuff that we're looking to offload)

Knowing that if it's relegated to a "battle of attrition", Russia will always win, they have more bodies to throw at the endeavor, that's been their MO is just about every conflict they've ever been involved in.

So serious question, is anyone willing to put US boots on the ground or not?

If not?, then it's probably time to cut and run and let chips fall where they may
Because the method of "let's just send Ukraine some stuff and they can take the casualties" isn't going to "beat" Russia, Ukraine will run out of warm bodies before Russia does.

Sending them the bare minimum is tantamount to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I agree, Ukraine should get more and modern stuff and the west should ramp up its production. The war has been going for two years and I don't think I'm aware of any ammunition production facilities that have been built in my neighbourhood.